Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!jessica.stanford.edu!bard From: bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: computer buyers Message-ID: <1991Jun6.182637.21898@leland.Stanford.EDU> Date: 6 Jun 91 18:26:37 GMT References: <55445@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1991Jun4.195937.5973@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Jun6.043819.23323@neon.Stanford.EDU> <1991Jun6.055911.24760@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Jun6.165722.17304@neon.Stanford.EDU> Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News) Organization: Academic Information Resources, Stanford University Lines: 67 In article <1991Jun6.165722.17304@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) writes: > >>> It's still possible to have a sophisticated and complex OS. The trick >>>is making those features usable by as many people as possible. > >>I agree completely. But there are different classes of computers, no? >>Just as there are different levels of aptitude out there in consumerland. > > Yes, and these computers are aimed at different markets. High-end >markets such as scientific/industrial users are usually prepared to >put up with "more difficult" administration/control, because the >pay-back of using the extra features is worth it. But when making the distinction between the Amiga and the Mac, it's clear that the markets are much the same. Single home or academic users looking for a startup system. Yet the OS's are dissimilar in complexity, enough to make a difference. How do you explain the fact that there are 3 million of those little 500s out there, and rising; they're being snapped up at a faster rate than Macs, yet the Mac is so much easier to deal with and has a much more aggressive ad campaign? > I argue that for 99% of the home market, and even a very large >percentage of the small business market, the market doesn't CARE about >the sophisticated/complex OS. How many Amiga 500 owners even know of >the existence of AREXX, for example? My point. They SHOULD care, or they'll get into trouble when they realize that the OS takes a steeper learning curve than they're used to. I would argue that a good number of those 2.5 million A500 users know how to deal with a startup-sequence or a CLI. Simply because it's there, and it's an integral part of the OS; and of the six 500 users I know at school and at home, it's something they learn within the first couple weeks of owning a 500. These are the same people that would have bought a Mac Classic, if it weren't so damned expensive and short on features. Dubious analogy: don't drive cross-country if you don't know how to change your oil. Stay home with your bicycle. > This market would probably recognise the benefit of a more >feature-filled OS, but unless those features are as easy to use >as the lesser OSes, they'll go for the lesser OS every time (assuming >of course that applications are equivalent on both. Applications are >far more important for this market than the OS) . Well, sure. Assuming equivalent applications, Workbench and the Desktop are selfsame GUIs, both WIMPs. But where the Amiga's strengths lie behind the GUI, the Mac has nothing but the GUI (out of the box, that is). Novice Amiga users don't see the underlying goodies until they become familiar with the system, generally only after they've bought it. >>Dave Hopper |MUYOM!/// Anthro Creep | NeXT Campus Consultant at Stanford >> | __ /// . . | Smackintosh/UNIX Consultant - AIR > ^^^ > Not for long, huh? Nope. 'Swhy I hold down four or five jobs at a time. One of 'em's bound to go under ;-) >Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu Take care, Dave Hopper |MUYOM!/// Anthro Creep | NeXT Campus Consultant at Stanford | __ /// . . | Smackintosh/UNIX Consultant - AIR bard@jessica. | \\\/// Ia! Ia! | Independent Amiga Developer Stanford.EDU | \XX/ Shub-Niggurath! | & (Mosh) Pit Fiend from Acheron